Today we'll explore the WEAC insurance companies called WEA Insurance Group.

The WEA Insurance Group is composed of five organizations:

• WEA Insurance Trust
• WEA Insurance Corporation
• WEA Tax Sheltered Annuity Trust
• WEAC Member Benefit Trust
• WEA Property & Casualty Insurance Company

These organizations are used to provide coverages such as health insurance, dental insurance, long term disability insurance, long term care insurance, automobile insurance, homeowners insurance and tax-sheltered annuities.

This is a spectacular picture from the WEA Trust that was created in 1970 with initial capitalization of $5,000 that was provided by WEAC.  By 1977, this Trust had become the thirteenth largest health insurer in Wisconsin.  By 1989, it employed 140 people, and now employs some 500 people and serves over 200,000 public school employees and family members.

It, as is its parent, is the 800 lb. gorilla so far as insurers providing coverage to school districts in Wisconsin.  It takes pride in the ways in which it developed new coverages for its members and in its record of few member complaints.

Among the breakthroughs it claims credit for are these:

• The trust was the first in the state to offer a disability plan that replaced 90% of a disabled employee's income.  (Typical insurance policies offer up to two-thirds of the employee's compensation to encourage those who are able to return to work as soon as possible, and to help hold insurance premium cost down for employers.)
• The Trust was the first insurer in Wisconsin to cover transplants as a standard benefit.  (Such breakthroughs have had to add costs to these plans that caused increases in premiums to employers.  Most insurers were hesitant to offer such coverage unless and until forced to do so by state mandate since they would've been priced uncompetitively with other insurers.)
• The Trust health plan covered psychiatric and chiropractic services "long before the law required insurance companies to offer such benefits".  (Again, we see marketplace differentiation that made it nearly impossible for other insurers to compete for school district business while it made the employers pay more due to these increased levels of service.)

We discussed Jane Doe's coverage cost to the district in a recent Blog.  Jane's cost to the district was $19,279 during the most recent school year, and she paid another 3% of the premium from her pocket as her contribution toward that cost.  Given the coming school year and plan changes that have been made by WEA Insurance Trust, the cost to the district for the most comparable program will go up to some $22,400 for an increase of about 16% in its cost.  (This is contrasted with an average increase in Wisconsin for other employers of about 4% this year according to a survey by the Mercer consulting firm released today.)

That same announcement based on the Mercer survey pointed out that $1,000 deductibles are now commonplace across America.  I would be amazed if a single school district in Wisconsin could be identified that has such a deductible in place.  Premium sharing by employees is often done on a 25%-75% or a 50%-50% basis in Wisconsin's workplaces, but in Jane's case there is a 3%-97% sharing arrangement.  It is not at all uncommon for employees of firms with fewer than 50 employees to have no health insurance coverage provided by their employer today.  That percentage is in the range of 50% to 60% in Wisconsin today.

WEA Insurance Trust points to its success with the following statistics:

• Health plan enrollment was 138,024 for 2007, or 71% of eligible school districts.
• Dental plan enrollment was 149,961 for 2007, or 78% of eligible school districts.
• Long term disability enrollment was 60,063 for 2007, or 75% of eligible school districts.
• Life plan enrollment was 36,237 for 2007, or 46% of eligible school districts.
• Long term care enrollment was 21,251 in 2007, or 23% of eligible school districts.

This is what the insurance industry calls "penetration" of a marketplace, and it points to the dominance that WEAC has in negotiating on behalf of its insurance companies.  I have spoken with people who have attempted to compete against the WEAC/WEA Insurance Trust insurance programs.  They have made presentations to Boards showing significant decreases with relatively little in the way of plan benefit reductions and few are ever successful in getting the business.  The union dominates this world.  Some question why the teachers would permit this to happen since the premium costs impact their pay due to the QEO rules, but I suspect any teacher who would voice his or her concern might feel uncomfortable in his or her peer group as the result.  And, it is great if you're in the cat bird's seat with the 'Cadillac' coverage.

If you read yesterday's piece, you may've noted that WEAC has universal health care as one of its legislative goals.  That would be great since they could then shift costs to all the state's citizens instead of just to those citizens in a district they provide coverage for.  And, most interesting of all is this overlooked fact:  WEAC had already obtained favorable treatment for its members in the Healthy Wisconsin program that was defeated last year.  Universal health care is great but they must still have better coverage for their members...and the party in control of state government was willing to cause that to happen.

Some have questioned the people costs of a school district but this kind of information helps us better understand where some of those costs originate. 

Surprise, Surprise...

I'm sure this must come as a great shock to us all.

The Wisconsin Technical College System Board voted 12-0 in favor of denying the petition request made by the Germantown School District to be permitted to leave the MATC district and move into the Moraine Park Technical College district.

We'll just have to shut up, pay our exorbitant MATC tax load and wait for another twenty years and try again.

In a very selfish way, I can at least look forward to many more opportunities to ridicule the MATC decision-making apparatus as well as the silly ways this group finds to divest themselves of our money.

When will we have a state government that wakes up to the folly of none-elected (appointed) boards that have taxing powers.  This is truly taxation without representation...and there seems not a thing we can do about it.

Maybe current MATC President Darnell Cole will eventually find another school that is willing to take him off our hands; I feel confident that he'll continue to look for more money and more people to tax.  After all, the goose that is called the MATC district is just about finished laying larger eggs.  I wonder if technical colleges also have powers of annexation?  That wouldn't come as too great a surprise, either.

I also wonder if we'll see more "free" laptops being donated to the library; and if we'll see that "splendid" cooperation between our industry and the MATC get even better.  We'd probably be wise to not hold our breath until that occurs.

~~~~~~~~~~

Knodl Konundrum - Chapter Two...

Dan Knodl has entered a plea of not guilty in Ozaukee County to the charges lodged against him over names published without the permission of those named.

I suspect that, at worst, he'll be fined a modest amount and life will go on.

I have to say, though, that I'd be very embarrassed if that were my campaign and I let that happen when I would've known I had a comfortable lead in such a dominant Republican stronghold.

~~~~~~~~~~

Mequon Road/Pilgrim Road Intersection Construction...

It seems that the construction in this main intersection in Germantown has gone on longer than had been expected.  I certainly hope this ends very soon so the roadway and traffic patterns can be restored prior to the Winter weather descending upon us.

I want to shift the focus now to the Wisconsin Education Association Council, or WEAC as it is commonly known.  Following this, we'll look at the WEAC affiliate that delivers health and other insurance coverages.

WEAC is among the state's 800 lb. gorillas so far as labor organizations are concerned.  It touts having some 98,000 members.  Its history shows a start in 1853, some 8 years after Wisconsin became a state.  It became known as WEAC in 1972 following adoption of collective bargaining laws for public employees in Wisconsin.

WEAC represents the following segments of education today: teachers, education support professionals, custodians, university students, state education employees, paraprofessionals, retired education support professionals, retired educators, library media specialists (one of whom, Mary Bell, is the current WEAC President), nutrition employees, school safety personnel, Wisconsin Technical College faculty and support staff, clerical staff, counselors, secretaries, teacher aides, bus drivers, cooks and state-employed education and information professionals.

WEAC's structure begins at the local level with the local unions such as the Germantown Education Association (GEA).

The local unions are members of a unified services unit, or UniServe unit, in their local area.  That unit includes the professionals required to support the locals, and is typically limited to some 1,200 to 1,500 individual union members.  Five of the largest school districts have their own UniServ units (Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay).  The staffs of each UniServ provide locals with collective bargaining, member rights, public relations, professional development, and political action assistance.

The UniServ entities are tied to WEAC in Madison and WEAC is a member of the National Education Association, or NEA located in Washington, D.C.

It is easy to see that this organization is very well developed for the functions it has carved out for itself.  That is among the reasons that education is such an effective political force.  I have made earlier references to the fact that WEAC has spent millions of dollars to assure an attentive audience in the halls of Wisconsin government and in the Governor's mansion.

WEAC has identified its major initiatives for the period 2008-2010 and those are:

School Funding  They state: "It is evident that school funding is broken.  It is at the center of discussion from local to local.  The WEAC Board of Directors has identified measures of success for school funding reform, and they are offering a comprehensive education to kids and fair compensation for members."

Health Care  They state:  "We know that under the Qualified Economic Offer we've been sacrificing salary increases for health insurance.  But WEAC's commitment to health care reform is much bigger.  We care deeply for kids and their families because we all know that health care is also a learning issue."

Professional Development & Licensure  They state:  "Educators are required to focus more attention than ever on licensing and professional development, and WEAC is stepping up to provide quality support and services.  You are the best person to manage your professional development, with support from your union and financing from your district."

Achievement Gaps  They state:  "This issue is very close to the hearts of WEAC members.  The frustration of not being able to meet the needs of all our students drives us to do more - demanding needed resources and bringing the issue forward into a public conversation.  We will continue our work to involve communities, corporations and government in closing the achievement gap."

Membership  They state:  "We are listening to what you need and value, and connecting your union to your daily work.  We are focusing on groups who are already organized - and those who are not yet - in order to fulfill the promise of public education for future generations."

I'll close this piece with the 2009-2010 WEAC legislative agenda.  Their printed material says:

"WEAC Supports Legislation To:

• Repeal the Qualified Economic Offer law.
• Repeal revenue caps.
• Make preparation time for educators a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.
• Increase funding for SAGE to provide $2,500 per low income pupil beginning in the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
• Implement voucher accountability.
• Make attendance of 5-year-old kindergarten mandatory and a prerequisite to admission to first grade.
• Treat education support professionals the same as teachers under the Wisconsin Retirement System in terms of qualifying for coverage and for early retirement calculations.
• Establish WTCS pay equity by requiring that the salary and fringe benefits of part-time technical college instructors be prorated based on the salary and fringe benefits of full-time staff.
• Create a loan forgiveness program for teaching math, science, special education and ELL in high-poverty districts.
• Repeal residency requirements.
• Provide a tax deduction for non-reimbursed classroom purchases.
• Adopt the 'Wisconsin Indoor Environmental Quality in Schools Act' for public school buildings.
• Require school boards to adopt anti-bullying policies.
• Allow parents to take leave time from work to attend school conferences and activities."

~~~~~~~~~~

Several things jump out at me as I write this but I'll use another piece to explore those.  The one major thing that occurs is that virtually everything about WEAC means higher costs of education which translates into restructuring school financing laws and that will ultimately translate into more tax dollars.

While we are discussing the area of compensation, I want to take a 'hypothetical' person whom we'll name Jane Doe, and look at her compensation package.

Jane is in her 10th year with the school district.  She has a Master's degree with less than 15 hours of added credit.  This places her in lane 4 and step 10 of the 'matrix' we discussed yesterday.  Assuming that Jane had her Master's degree in the 2006-2007 school year, her base salary would've been $47,937.  In the 2007-2008 school year, her base salary was $49,703, an increase of some 3.7% even though there was no new contract settled and, thus, no new pay schedule in place.

In the school year we are in today, 2008-2009, Jane would be earning a base salary of $51,469 for an increase year over year of 3.55%.  A QEO offer would've more than doubled those increase percentages for Jane.

Total compensation for Jane this past school year was $85,406 inclusive of benefits in addition to base salary.

My point in this exercise is to give citizens some real life numbers to which they can relate versus the percentages that get thrown about without any actual meaning to most of us.

I do not begrudge the income that our educators earn.  It is very important that our children are well-educated and good teachers are a large part of that equation.

Next, we'll look at the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) and the WEA Insurance Group.

First, there was a story by Thomas J. McKillen in the November 15th edition of Germantown Express News concerning the November 10th School Board meeting.  In that story there were quotes attributed to Jon Stachowiak who is the President of the Germantown Education Association.  The article stated:

"GEA President Jon Stachowiak opened his remarks...by noting that Germantown ranked 'number one in all levels' on the WKCE test scores out of 50 school districts in southeast Wisconsin."

"'The teachers have led their students to a high level of success', Stachowiak said."

"He further stated that two-thirds of district teaching staff have Master's Degrees."

"'This success achieved on the WKCE test is not achieved by putting in a contracted day or working to the minimum", Stachowiak said."

It is important that we recognize the excellence in our district; I was pleased to see this in print.  I thought it also interesting that this had been achieved with the classroom crowding we have been told about.

In that same meeting, Stachowiak also cited that teachers had higher wages in the Hartford, Slinger, West Bend and Kewaskum districts, and said that "another offer by the school board which is the state minimum will not be accepted".  I was disappointed that this comment was made in this setting; that seemed more appropriate in a negotiating session and the board meeting was not being held for that purpose so far as I know.  Additionally, I don't know what he meant by "will not be accepted".  That sounds like a job action of some sort could result.

Teacher compensation has always been a bit of a mystery to me, and I suspect it may be for you, also.

We have a step system in place in Germantown which recognizes the combination of tenure and education.  There are a total of 84 different steps, or pay grades, in this matrix.  It is this matrix that is affected by the QEO that we covered in the first part of this discussion.  If a 3.8% increase is made, part of that goes for benefits and the rest, if there is a "rest", goes for salary and is applied to this matrix.

My understanding is that it is possible for teachers to gain salary increases even if no increase has been granted through contract negotiations.  That would happen if more credit hours had been earned, or if a new degree level had been achieved, or if tenure demarcations had been passed.  It is also possible for both education and tenure increases to be involved and that could see a higher increase in overall salary without regard to contract negotiations.  It seems that it can also be said that increases in total are not always limited to the 3.8% or whatever had been approved.  Certainly, steps could be passed at the same time increases were made to the matrix.

The step increases max out, I believe, when a teacher has obtained a Master's Degree with an additional 30 credit hours earned, and has at least 14 years in the district.  The GEA President mentioned that two-thirds of our district's teachers have their Master's Degrees, although I have no idea as to the cumulative years in the district for any of those people.  That suggests to me that our district has more people in the higher steps than in the lower steps, thus the overall costs to the district would be higher than might seem to be the case.

The 'rule of thumb' I've heard applied says that some 85% of the district budget is consumed by people costs.

This is basically how the system looks at this time.  I want to explore the benefit cost implications and am planning that for another part to this discussion since it could take some time to put together. 

The angst that followed the election concerning the defeat of the referenda items has subsided a bit.  I want to explore the whole subject of education in our community and state, and have been discussing many issues with those involved including school board members from communities in Wisconsin, educators and taxpayers.  I have no idea how long this series will run, but the input of the citizenry is important and I hope this might provoke some additional rational discussion.

~~~~~~~~~~

I was off the mark on the qualified economic offer (QEO) when I referred to it as the maximum amount that could be provided to teachers in the combination of salary and benefits.  The QEO was instituted in 1993 and replaced the then mediation and arbitration system,  It provided that school boards providing at least 3.8% increases of salary and benefits combined would be protected from binding arbitration which had been problematic for school districts up to that time.  In this sense, the QEO is the minimum and usually the maximum.

There are teachers/former teachers who would admit that the QEO has served to protect the jobs of teachers that might otherwise have been cut in the old binding arbitration days since the arbitrators could assess whatever they felt was appropriate in terms of combined increases without regard to the district's ability to pay the added load.

Similarly, those people would also indicate that rescission of the current QEO rules and their replacement with mediation/arbitration, as the governor has tried to gain over the past several budgets, would probably cause teacher terminations since the proposed mediation/arbitration language has been moot on the subject of districts' ability to pay.  That leads, I suspect, to some of the 'scare' tactics citizens face whenever teachers' compensation is debated.  We almost always hear of the 'programs that will have to be ended if...' there were to be limits to increases proposed.  Those debates seldom, if ever, are concerned with actual reductions, but almost always with limits to the amounts of increases.

The cost of healthcare has played a significant part in the rising cost of education.  The 3.8% increase has to cover the cost of benefits and compensation.  If the health premium increases in double-digits annually, that translates into relatively little remaining for salary increases.  In the unregulated world that most of us occupy, the employer makes the decisions and enforces those decisions.  That world does not exist in education.

So, it is possible to extrapolate that the removal of QEO and its replacement with mediation/arbitration, without consideration for a district's ability to pay, could result in teacher losses, increased class sizes and some issues surrounding the nebulous issue of 'quality of education'.  That issue is nebulous in that it is poorly defined on a consistent basis.  It seems that whenever we get into those discussions, the achievement side becomes dynamic so that it is never quite possible to gather information permitting solid decision-making to occur.  Cause and effect are difficult to equate in those discussions.  That coupled with the emotional response that comes very quickly from one or both sides fairly well suggests that we'll not get to a good, solid, well-informed decision.

Under our current rules, after the 3.8% has been granted by the district, and that is not acceptable to the teachers, a mediator is brought in to attempt to help the sides find common ground.  If neither side is willing to give ground, the mediator can declare an impasse and the 3.8% offer is put into place with no further negotiation.  This has tilted the equation to the district's side and it has been that way since QEO was created.  It is understandable that teachers would find this 'unfair' even though you and me might think 3.8% was a pretty fair increase...especially if we've not received an increase for awhile...or if we've lost our job due to cutbacks.

Next time, we'll look at some hypotheticals that put some numbers in place.

Sendik's Food Market 60 Days Later...

I have yet to encounter a Sendik's associate who wasn't happy to be there and who wasn't happy to help me.

I have noted that the facility remains bright and cheery with a very clean floor, which I thought might be problematic given carpeting.  Winter will be a bigger challenge.  Shelves are always fully stocked; delicious samples are scattered throughout the store.

I don't know about you, but I am happy Sendik's selected Germantown as the site for one of their beautiful grocery facilities.

~~~~~~~~~~

Veterans Day 2008...

Remember that the 2008 Veterans Day ceremony will be held at the Veterans Memorial at the corner of Freistadt Road and Park Avenue on Sunday, November 9th at 10:30AM.  If you've not seen the memorial, it is worth your time.

A little history...

Veterans Day was originally known as Armistice Day when proclaimed by President Woodrow Wilson for November 11, 1919 to celebrate all veterans of World War I.  It finally became known as Veterans Day on November 8, 1954 when Congress amended the act to change the name and to have the day honor all veterans who have served their country.  The President was Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The American Legion will also conduct a flag disposal ceremony following the program so that you can properly dispose of any torn, tattered and/or faded American Flag you may have.

~~~~~~~~~~

County Supervisors Cut Property Tax Levy...

The supervisors agreed to take half of the county's sales tax revenue into the operating budget for 2009.

Unfortunately, this budget cuts the $35,000 for the County Convention and Visitors Bureau and cuts $15,000 from the Fair Park.  The Village of Germantown is working to assist the Convention and Visitors Bureau since it receives significant promotion from that organization and felt that the funding cut by the county would have consequences for the community and its merchants.

The county set a 2009 tax rate of $2.71 per $1,000 which is down about $0.10 per $1,000 from this year.

~~~~~~~~~~

SRO Officer In Schools...

I had the pleasure of meeting SRO Tim Miller during the Citizen Police Academy session this past Wednesday evening.  He gave us an overview of his duties in the schools and discussed the changes that have been brought about since this program was initiated.  "SRO" means School Resource Officer.  The SRO is a sworn officer and funding for this position is paid jointly by the school district and the police department on a 75%-25% ratio, respectively.

Our high school is a much quieter place of learning than before the initiation of this program several years ago.  Student fights seldom occur now; the SRO has formed relationships that help both students and administration.  And, students develop, I suspect, a much different view of police officers having had this experience.  The SRO is available for class instruction whenever the subject matter entails.  SRO Miller, in this case, can 'tell it like it is' during driver education and health classes, for example.

This strikes me as a very good use of taxpayer dollars that provides both a current payback as well as future benefits.

GEA Members Protesting...

I have learned that teachers in Germantown, members of the Germantown Education Association, are apparently protesting by wearing black clothing, or black armbands and pins over their lack of a contract that expired a few months earlier.

The offer from the Board/Administration was in accordance with the QEO (qualified economic offer) rules still in effect in Wisconsin that cite a maximum of 3.8% compensation increase including benefits according to my information.

I Blogged yesterday about the QEO going away in Wisconsin given Democrat control and WEAC support.

Could this be the first salvo in that battle?  Is it just coincidence that this occurs the day after the election, or is it part of well-planned scenario to force that issue sooner rather than later.

~~~~~~~~~~

GOP Voter Turn-Out Down In Washington County...

I learned from an benefits industry newsletter this morning that voter turn-out on the GOP side of the race for president were off from the most recent similar race.

Washington County showed 50,641 votes for Bush in 2004 while there were a total of 47,725 votes cast for McCain.  Waukesha County showed 9,837 fewer votes for McCain versus Bush in 2004, and Ozaukee County reported 2,744 fewer votes for McCain versus Bush.

Given the intensity of the campaigning and other races that were involved, this would seem to suggest that conservatives were really 'put out' over being forced to cast votes for the least desirable of the Republican candidates that started the race.

These three counties are solid conservative counties typically.  Maybe this was a backlash or maybe there were more casual Republican voters who were swayed to cast their ballots for Obama because they liked him rather than as a protest of their selection.

~~~~~~~~~~

MATC Response Opposing The Germantown School District Petition Filed...

A 54 page response is available for your review on the MATC website if you like.  I've gleaned some of that information as follows:

• "MATC offers the highest quality and greatest variety of programs and learning opportunities in the most diverse college in Wisconsin.  Germantown has benefited enormously from MATC's resources."
• "As discussed below, reorganization would certainly not be in the best interests of the hundreds of Germantown residents who attend MATC, utilizing programming and coursework that is unavailable at Moraine Park."
• "...Germantown has not presented any compelling reason to sever its productive, long-standing relationship with MATC and realign Germantown with Moraine Park.  To do so would-in effect-place an unfunded mandate upon MATC by reducing its revenues without any corresponding reduction in costs.  Programming and enrollment data strongly suggest that Germantown residents will continue to attend MATC and utilize its resources, even if reorganization occurs."

This could, and does, go on and on through the course of the 15 page letter signed by the MATC President, Dr. Darnell E.Cole, and the MATC Board Chairperson, Lauren Baker.

It asserts that there is no real reason for the petition other than our desire to get out from under the $5.7 million annual tax burden (that MATC fails to acknowledge has climbed exponentially over time).  It complains that the sole reason for the petition is financial and it says that isn't permitted as a reason for consideration.

I was struck by the fact that MATC can decry the petition on the basis of the financial havoc that would be visited on MATC but the citizens of the school district are denied the same opportunity.

MATC brags about the unique courses available, and the commuting distance differences.

That rings hollow to me since there has been no indication that Germantown students, as few as they are in total number, are seeking out MATC for those "unique" courses.  The discussion of "distance" rings hollow for me since I can drive "more quickly and more easily" from Germantown to West Bend than to either the Mequon campus or the downtown campus.

MATC points out the $2.7 million investment made in the Mequon campus over the past ten years but fails to acknowledge the $40 to $50 million in taxes paid by us citizens over that same time span.  Again, the point of money is made by MATC but cannot be used to defend the petition.

MATC says it would have to engage in "substantial" program/job cuts" if the petition were to be approved.  What a novel idea for this organization contrasted with the endless tax increases that have been and will continue to be levied.  Once again, they can use the fiscal fact set they create to defend against our petition but we cannot use the fiscal fact set we create to auger in favor of our petition.

I  have long maintained that the likelihood of a ruling favorable to the Germantown School District in its petition to move to Moraine Park was a long shot, at best.

Reading the story put together to defend the poorly run MATC organization makes me ill, as it also helps me see that the likelihood of a favorable ruling is probably much more remote than I had ever supposed.

This is such a classic case of a non-elected governmental body with taxing authority being judged by its own parent to the detriment of us citizens.  This simply has to change...but that isn't going to happen for the time period during which the Democrats control state government.  I'd simply better come to understand that and forget trying to tip windmills.

I had intended to scan a copy of the sample ballot for Germantown however that wasn't sufficiently legible.  So, we'll list the offices for which there are candidate selections to be made by all of us who are registered to vote in the village.

You may elect to vote a straight ticket including, in the order found on the ballot:

• Democratic
• Republican
• Wisconsin Green
• Libertarian

The race for President and Vice President, in the order found on the ballot:

• Barack Obama/Joe Biden (Democratic)
• John McCain/Sarah Palin (Republican)
• Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente (Wisconsin Green)
• Bob Barr/Wayne A. Root (Libertarian)
• Brian Moore/Stewart A. Alexander (Socialist Party USA)
• Gloria LaRiva/Robert Moses (Party for Socialism, & Liberation)
• Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez (Independent)
• Chuck Baldwin/Darrell L. Castle (Constitution Party)
• Jeffrey J. Wamboldt/David J. Klimisch (We, the People)
• Write-in________________

Representative in Congress District 5, in the order found on the ballot:

• F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Republican)
• Robert R. Raymond (Independent)
• Write-in________________

State Senator District 8, in the order found on the ballot:

• Sheldon A. Wasserman (Democratic)
• Alberta Darling (Republican)
• Write-in________________

Representative to the Assembly District 24, in the order found on the ballot:

• Charlene S. Brady (Democratic)
• Dan Knodl (Republican)
• Write-in________________

District Attorney:

• Todd K. Martens (Republican)
• Write-in________________

County Clerk:

• Brenda J. Jaszewski (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Treasurer:

• Janice Gettelman (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Register of Deeds:

• Sharon Martin (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Referendum - Germantown School District

Question #1:

Shall the following Initial Resolution be approved?

INITIAL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,500,000

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that there shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $22,500,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of constructing a new elementary school on school district property next to Kinderberg Park; technology, safety and security initiatives District wide; and acquiring furnishings, fixtures and equipment.

Yes ____

No   ____

Question #2

Shall the following Resolution be approved?

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET TO EXCEED REVENUE LIMIT BY $500,000

FOR RECURRING PURPOSES

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that the revenues included in the School District budget for the 2010-2011 school year and thereafter be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $500,000 a year, for recurring purposes consisting of costs associated with the new elementary school.

Yes ____

No   ____

~~~~~~~~~~

The ballot is two-sided as you would expect from the many questions.

The Sunday Journal Sentinel contains a story by Tom Kertscher that discusses the school referenda with interviews of Bruce Warnimont, school board member, and others representing both sides of the debate over a new elementary school and the operating cap 'forgiveness' that would permit an additional $500,000 for operations of the new school.

Mr. Warnimont is quoted as pointing out the potential, based on presumed increases in full day kindergarten enrollment, for the increases in state aid to offset or exceed the cost of the referenda issues on the property tax bills in the district.  He is very knowledgeable on such things and I do not presume to espouse a position, either pro or con, in this Blog.

I will say that this is a most counterintuitive argument.  How does one approve a $22.5 MM bond issue and an additional $500M in annual operating costs and still see his or her property tax bill stay the same or decrease so far as the school district's portion of that bill?  The assumption is that some 230 full time kindergarten students would be enrolled (76 more than now) and that the additional state funding would offset the tax increases necessary to pay off the building and to operate the school.

Those in favor point to this as justification while those opposed point to this skeptically given that there can be no assurances that the supposition will prove valid.

I have difficulty in thinking that anyone would be disingenuous and therefore presume that each side is speaking what it considers to be the truth.  Perhaps I am terribly naive but I hope that isn't the case.

Given the lay of the land today so far as this project goes, I must say that I am happy to be an interested observer and not a direct participant on either side.  As I stated above, this is one tough counterintuitive argument to mount.  I do not know how I will vote but you can be sure I will vote.  I trust that the vast majority of our school district citizens will vote, as well.  We need to learn the true will of the people...and this election should point that out...unless the referenda pass by a handful or lose by a handful of votes.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept..."

That lead-in to the old Mission Impossible television show came to mind as I pondered today's Village Buzz topic possibilities.

I take some of our elected representatives to task now and then, and some of you readers do the same in your comments.  Maybe it is time for us to "put up or shut up" as the old saying goes (not really but it gets the point across).  If we have ideas as to how our governing entities could do things differently, lets put those on the table and see if any grow legs.

For example, we see privatized prisons popping up around the country.  That happened because the private sector found a use for capital that took a burden from the shoulders of the taxpayer.  I read of the latest Scott Walker budget proposals for Milwaukee County and thought that he has to be among the most creative politicians I've seen in some time (and, I hope he runs for Governor again).

What is there in our small world that could be done differently if we were to 'color outside the lines' for awhile?  At the risk of angering entrenched interests, I'll throw out a few thoughts along those lines (remember that there may be some current impediments but that most impediments are man-made and could be altered if we demanded that):

Why not look to the private sector to build a school building that we can lease?  The lessor could be obligated to handle all repairs, for example, over the term of the lease to assure that things that break get fixed on a timely basis instead of being delayed until they manifest as something worse.  I see many former hospitals that have been turned into apartment buildings, for example.  Just because a building is built to house students, doesn't have to mean that it would always be a school building.  As population ebbs and flows, this would give the taxpayer some welcomed flexibility.  Would this be workable?  We won't know unless we ask the questions.

What about a charter school or an Internet school option to take student-count pressure off the buildings now available?  Might that also reduce the personnel costs? 

Many communities have hired assessor organizations and building inspector organizations to do their specialized work instead of retaining this talent on their own payrolls.  Why not go through an extensive review of what we could do along those lines.  That might reduce costs.  It might eliminate our angst over rising benefit costs that have been negotiated and about which we can do nothing even as we watch the private sector deal with those same issues.  Current employees with those skills might welcome the opportunity to become entrepreneurs and build new companies that other communities could employ.

Would it be possible to contract for road repair and shift some of the uncertainties off onto a private sector entity?  Private business is accustomed to taking risk.  Government tends to have to avoid risk and that adds expense.  Road salting and snow plowing, for example, is a real problem given a hard winter and higher salt costs.  If a private firm were contracted, it would bear that risk.  I see many landscape firms that become snow plowers and salters in the winter.  Is that worth exploring?

Would it make sense to lease computer servers for the village's use and have those housed in a private data center that does that as its primary business?  The village wouldn't have need for the IT skills that it might today.  Leasing of such systems might prove more economical and is an expense for which we could plan.

In most of these examples, the private sector would probably be more efficient, less susceptible to the political winds that blow hot and then cold, more intent on running very tightly controlled operations, etc.  Where there is a true risk/reward relationship that is properly negotiated and vetted, I believe that the private sector is simply better at that than is a government body.  And, as the "sidewalk" issue shows, I feel certain that the private sector can get things done in shorter time periods in most cases.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept" is to come up with your own ideas that might be capable of altering the way we look at the world of Germantown government and the Germantown school system today.  I look forward to your comments...if you are brave enough/foolish enough to offer those.  Most of you, at least, have anonymity on your side.  I'm just hanging out there with my zipper down.

New School Support Group Formed... 

Tom Kertscher has written on JSOnline that a new group has been formed in Germantown for purposes of supporting the school referenda.

The organizers appear to be Sara Sina and Merissa Osswald and their email address is abettergermantown@gmail.com if you'd like to make contact.  They reportedly will establish a website at www.abettergermantown.com but that has not yet been turned on to the public.

Larry Prodoehl, president of Germantown Citizens Action Coalition may again become active on the opposition side of the equation although that announcement has yet to be made.

The forum of the Village Buzz is certainly available for a debate on the issues should these two groups desire.  The more information that can be gotten into the hands of more voters, the better for us all regardless of the outcome of the election.

There has been speculation that the greater voter turn-out would auger favorably for the referenda proponents.  The last Presidential race in 2004 saw some 11,500 votes cast in Germantown.

Waste Management Draws Line In The Sand...

Waste Management has advised the Teamsters Local 200 leadership that it will amend the offer currently on the table if the union members have not been given complete information on the latest proposal and an opportunity to vote prior to 4:00PM this coming Sunday.  Among the changes would be a reduction in the amount being offered over the coming 5 years.

I don't know for how long Waste Management will be able to keep their replacement workers on the job, but it does seem that the leverage of the union may have eroded a bit since the Harley 105th Anniversary crowd has gone home and there seems relatively little complaint, at least in Germantown, about late garbage pick-ups.

Quiet Thursday...

I'll be unable to Blog tomorrow but will be back with you on Friday.  See...you can catch a break once in awhile ;>)

School District Referenda...

District residents will have the opportunity to make their wishes known with the news that two referenda items will appear on the local ballots.  The votes were unanimous with one member, Bruce Warnimont, absent from the special meeting.

The first item will see the question concerning approval of borrowing $22.5M to support the building of a new elementary school building for approximately $17.5M while using the balance for security and plant upgrades at the other existing school buildings.  The Journal Sentinel story this morning stated the cost to a homeowner with a $200,000 home would amount to about $74 per year.

The second item is the question concerning the district being authorized to borrow $500,000 for current operating expenses in excess of the current revenue cap.  That same homeowner would see this item add some $30 per year to the property tax bill.

Business Manager Ric Ericksen was quoted as saying that these costs would drop after existing debt is paid off in 2012.

Yesterday's Blog on this subject saw a healthy exchange of ideas and information amongst readers.  I hope we might see that exchange continue.

Knodl Konundrum...

I missed my guess on this item; I expected it to die down after a couple of days.  But, it seems this story has grown some fairly strong legs.

That has no doubt been caused by the original complaint filing by the Menomonee Falls resident, a letter from Jason LaSage to Dan Knodl that found its way into the Journal Sentinel story this morning...and some relatively questionable handling by Knodl himself.

Radio talk shows have continued to discuss this situation and reporters have obviously decided it has some continuing merit.

And, the longer this goes on, the more I begin to wonder if there isn't something more here than I originally felt to be the case.

The initial response from Knodl seemed plausible.  The subsequent statements that differ a bit from that original explanation raise some further questions...simply because the explanation has changed.  I hope the investigation by the Ozaukee County DA will be conducted promptly and that this can be put to rest so that it doesn't cloud the November election anymore than the facts, once exposed, justify.

Vote Today...

There is still time to vote.  Polls are open until 8:00PM.  I voted at about 10:30AM and was number 112 in my district.  Two contested races will be decided by today's vote.

Sendik's Again...

I was VERY pleased to learn yesterday that, at my age with sparse grey hair (stubble actually), I can actually purchase beer, wine or liquor in the Sendik's liquor store WITHOUT the need to show someone that I'm at least 21 years old.

And, I can report that items I purchase regularly appear to be priced at or below the prices in the neighboring establishment...at least during the initial stages of their operation.  Maybe that will change, but I hope not.

School Referendum...

Ty Finke reports in an adjacent article that the school board has approved the administration preparing a new referendum question for the November election concerning a new elementary building, and additional funds for two other needs identified.

I really think this is going to antagonize the electorate, but I have been wrong before.  The probable thinking is that with the normally heavy turn-out during a Presidential election, the issue will be carried substantially.  I have no way of knowing, but I fear this will pollute the stream no matter the side one finds himself or herself supporting.

Apparently a special meeting will be called to review the question before a final commitment is made.  Citizens need to make their positions known before and during that meeting.

An angry electorate will do no one any good, and could backfire to the eventual detriment of the community.  Emotion is a tough taskmaster and yields strange decisions on occasion.

Special Board Meeting Follow-Up...

The special board meeting to be convened at 5:30PM tonight deals, in part, with the Waste Management strike and garbage pick-up delays.  I received an email from President Kempinski over the week-end discussing my Village Buzz piece of late last week.

He indicated that the Waste Management topic had been added to the special meeting agenda to "keep the Board apprised as to the status of collection, and determine if the Board wishes to change companies should the company fall even further behind".  He went on to state that he didn't want to change companies but that he felt compelled to explore alternatives in case service should drop to even lower levels.

I had indicated that our personal experience was that Friday's pick-up was made on Friday.  He mentioned that the village had received calls indicating that pick-ups had been delayed two days in some instances.

President Kempinski also discussed the eventuality of switching to Veolia if Waste Management's service degraded to the point where that would be necessary.  His reasoning seemed to be that, if this went on for some time, and if many communities had similar experiences, there could be a wholesale departure from Waste Management that would overwhelm Veolia's capabilities.

He believes that, if Veolia comes back to the village indicating that it would be willing to accept the terms of the Waste Management agreement, the Board would be willing to switch.

A couple of thoughts come to mind:

If the current agreement has a five-day clause and if Waste Management continues to pick up garbage within that time span, does the village have any real recourse?

Even if there is a wholesale move away from Waste Management, maybe Germantown would, by staying with Waste Management after some agreement renegotiation actually see improved service since Waste Management would have less business and would likely be trying very diligently to repair the image damage it would've suffered.

I'll report on the discussion from today's special meeting in a 'Village Buzz' item tomorrow, if not before.

~~~~~~~~~~

School District Budget Deliberations...

An earlier segment on the current budget debate within the Germantown School District referred to some debate as to the size and configuration of the budget for the coming year.

It appears that this debate continues and centers on the draft prepared by the Administration which does not yet meet the constraints that at least some Board members feel necessary.  A target amount of $39,495,814 had been established last spring.  The administration has continued to stand behind a proposed budget that is some $650,000 higher.

Obviously, the school district has a relatively new business manager although he did have experience gained as a member of the school board when assuming that position.  There was over-spending in several accounts that were discretionary in nature as opposed to accounts that are relatively 'locked in'.  This apparently has caused some concern as to fiscal constraint. 

We also have a new superintendent who certainly has been working hard to learn his new district's idiosyncrasies and needs while also working to build his board and staff relationships.  That may be at work to some degree but it seems that staff would be anxious to follow its new leader rather than 'stand in the doorway'.

I suppose that staff might be expected to seek more money than the board is willing to provide, but, at some point, posturing has to give ground to reality.

That was the title of an editorial appearing this morning in the Journal Sentinel.  It went on with a header that read: "Germantown officials should drop the effort to secede from the Milwaukee Area Technical College.  The savings aren't worth the cost."

I was quite interested to see what logic had led the editorial group to reach this conclusion.  Even though the petition cannot be about money, they admit that this would probably save the Germantown taxpayer with a home valued at $300,000 about $129 per year, or a little more if the change requested led to a slight decrease in the tax rate for the new district, MPTC.

They opined that this was simply not worth the cost...not to those of us in Germantown necessarily, but to the seven county metropolitan area.  It would "deprive" MATC of some $5.5 million in revenue.  They talk about this being harmful to the students of MATC including those from Germantown.  If there are 100 students from our area attending MATC, the cost to the Germantown School District taxpayer has to be in the range of $55,000 per student per year.  If there are 200, then we drop all the way down to an average of $27,500 per student per year.  That is an over-simplification but it helps put all this into perspective.

They discuss what they see as the poor timing of this and, in essence, lay blame for whatever happens to the seven county area economic development efforts at our feet if the petition is approved.  Wow!  If only we'd known what power we had before this, we could've really gone for something big!

We now become an integral part of the Milwaukee metropolitan region.  Funny how that is always the case when they seek our money, but is never the case when they're formulating some master plan.

The editorial does finally admit that MATC's taxes are too high, and they say that officials there need to place "some restraint" on expenditures.  That message doesn't seem to get through, however, to an appointed (unelected) board that rolls over every time MATC President Darnell Cole says "roll over".

Now, back to that $129 that we're not supposed to be concerned about.   For the Germantown School District, that could easily have been converted to a new elementary school.  That would've taken some $84 of the tax relief had this been available when we all voted on that issue...before prices climbed.  It could've likely funded our village road repair coffers very nicely on the balance of $45 per $300,000 of home value.

$129 isn't 'chump change' as so many would try to shame us into believing. 

And why is it our responsibility to pump more and more money into MATC so that it can try, unsuccessfully, to repair some of the MPS damage?  Why is it our responsibility to sit out here in 'the boonies' (from the perspective of the decision-makers in Milwaukee) and continually cough up more money for their needs.  When do they reciprocate? 

Proposed School District Budget...

I received an email from School Board Director Bruce Warnimont today with a link to the "work in progress" budget for 2008/2009.  He was careful to point out that the Board has not yet vetted it.  The Finance Committee meets this coming Monday night and it is likely that the budget will be discussed at that meeting.

Comments from the public are viewed as carrying great weight, especially in these formative stages.  Warnimont pointed out, for example, that "Fund 41", in school accounting jargon, is the area where all the larger physical improvement/repair projects get funded.  This is also unique in that this fund's size is established by District residents by direct vote at the Annual Meeting in October.  Once that amount has been set, the Board has no power to alter the appropriation.  While it tends to defy logic, an increase in this fund  does not necessarily mean higher tax rates.  The additional funding, if approved, would come from another area within the budget.

The upshot is this:  If you have some thoughts about things that need to be improved or repaired in the coming year, this is the time to make those thoughts known in person.

I have not had time to review the information found by clicking this link, but want to get it into your hands, if you desire to review it, as soon as possible.

I can tell you that Warnimont doesn't sound too enthusiastic about this draft and there may be others with similar thoughts.  I suspect there may be a move to task the administration to review and revise.  If it were to be approved as stands, it would involve an overall tax levy increase of 11% over last year.  That doesn't translate into an 11% property tax increase, incidentally.  It would threaten the trend of school district-related property tax decreases we've seen recently, however.

Board of Education Meeting Review:

The agenda item concerning the secession petition involved some back and forth amongst board members.  Mr. Warnimont pointed out that the Board was already on record with its action of September 24, 2007 to the effect that the secession petition would go forward.  There was some discussion as to which district would be preferable to MATC.  Mr. Bowe indicated that his position favoring WCTC would probably change given new information he had developed.  Among the reasons was the indication that fire fighters seemed to favor the program offered by MPTC over that offered by WCTC.  Mr. Warnimont indicated that he remained in favor of WCTC based on his analysis.

The long and the short of this discussion and the ensuing vote is this:  The Board will have the petition in its hands by the meeting on September 8th, will make its final decision on desired district and will proceed with the filing prior to the deadline established by the Technical College System.

There was some consternation amongst Board members that they were being castigated in the press for having delayed this process.  It was pointed out that, given the Technical College System process, filing last year or filing this year prior to the deadline would have no effect on the actual date the secession could occur if approved.  The date of such a change, if approved, is set forth and is inflexible.

Discussion concerning the building referendum issue included a review of the findings from the recent survey.  There were 11,647 pieces mailed to district homes, and a response rate of some 15% had been logged.  This was felt to be a good return at a total cost of $4,200.  The results seemed to echo the election results in terms of the number in favor and the number opposed.

Mr. Warnimont indicated that recent reviews of the cost changes since the referendum was defeated showed an overall increase of about 20% if no changes were made to the plan as presented earlier.  This increase was caused by the general increase in prices being felt in most sectors of the economy.

If I had to guess as to what direction the Board will take regarding the referendum, I would expect that we'll not see the question on the ballot again until possibly in the spring of 2009.  I would also expect that the proposal for the elementary building will have been revised.

~~~~~~~~~~

Tax Knowledge Test Answers:

Remember that the questions asked for a true or false answer.

• Property taxes pay for most of the costs of the K-12 public schools in Wisconsin.
• False.  The most recent data we have available states that in 2004-05, gross property taxes paid for 38% of school districts' budgets in Wisconsin.  During that same period, inter-governmental aid paid for 56% of school districts' budgets.  The public opinion survey showed that 65% of survey respondents believed that property taxes fund the majority of costs for public K-12 education.
• Wisconsin taxpayers pay more of their personal income toward state and local taxes today than they did 10 years ago.
• False.  In 1994, the Wisconsin tax burden as a percent of personal income was 13.5%.  The most recent data available is for 2006; that year, Wisconsin taxpayers paid 11.6% of their income in taxes.  The public opinion survey found that 78% of respondents believed the statement was true.
• Wisconsin collects more money from sales taxes than it does from gasoline taxes and corporate taxes combined.
• True.  In 2007, sales tax accounted for 19% of all state and local taxes collected.  Corporate and gasoline taxes accounted for a total of 9% combined.  The public opinion survey found that only 26% of respondents believed the statement was true, while 35% believed the statement was false.

 (This courtesy of The Wisconsin Way.)

Test Your Tax Knowledge... 

A group named The Wisconsin Way sent an email today that had the following test of tax knowledge.  I'll re-publish this tomorrow with the answers added so you can check yours.

True or False:

1. Property taxes pay for most of the costs of the K-12 public schools in Wisconsin.
2. Wisconsin taxpayers pay more of their personal income toward state and local taxes today than they did 10 years ago.
3. Wisconsin collects more money from sales taxes than it does from gasoline taxes and corporate taxes combined.

~~~~~~~~~~

School Board Meeting Tonight...

The Board of Education meeting convenes at 7:00 PM tonight in the District Administrative Offices and agenda item VIII. B. "Discussion with appropriate action regarding secession from the MATC district" is included under "Unfinished Business".

This is an important topic and I'll cover the discussion and any public action tomorrow in another Village Buzz edition.

~~~~~~~~~~

Sendik's: Beehive of activity...

If you've not been past the new Sendik's facility during the day, it is a beehive of activity.  The crews working on this project have consumed most of the parking spaces in front of the building.  If they don't make their target opening date, it won't be for lack of trying!

~~~~~~~~~~

Thomas Square Bread Bagels...

Believe it or not, the George Weston Bakeries company responded by mail to my question about Thomas Square Bread Bagels.  Unfortunately, they told me that these are not currently available apparently anywhere in the U.S.  They didn't say 'never', so I'll continue to hope.  I wonder what the problem is that is keeping those off the market.  They sold very quickly.  Could it be that&